Sayfadaki görseller
PDF
ePub

was corrected, he wrote to the right hon. gentleman a letter, in which he requested that a copy of the newspaper should be sent to him. The newspaper was accordingly sent; and when he saw the paragraph, he had no hesitation in saying, that it was a gross calumny on the character of the right hon. gentleman, and a strange misrepresentation of what he had himself said. In consequence of this, he wrote a second note to the right hon. gentleman, stating his opinion of the incorrectness of the paragraph, and promising that he would put on paper, as nearly as he could

a distinction, but as a means whereby we might be enabled more fearlessly to withstand the encroachments of the Crown on one hand, and the inroads of popular licentiousness on the other. He had now discharged his duty in laying this case before the House, as also what had been said in extenuation of it. As it related to himself personally, he should not suggest to the House the mode in which they ought to dispose of it; but he trusted they would dispose of it in such a manner as would vindicate the privileges of the House, and secure to themselves those immunities on which the rights and liber-recollect, every word that he had actually ties of the country so essentially depend. The right hon. gentleman then sat down; after which the clerk proceeded to read the two paragraphs to which Mr. Canning had called the attention of the House. When the clerk came to the words "continued cheers,"

Mr. Canning said, that as to the continued cheers which were said to have taken place, though he had made considerable inquiry, he could not find any individual who had any recollection of them. After the reading of these papers was concluded, a short pause ensued, which was ended by the rising of

Mr. Hume, who said, that he would state as concisely as he could, the view which he had taken of the present question. On the night previous to the day on which he had received Mr. Canning's first communication he had been in the House till a very late hour, and as he had occasion to attend an election committee that day at 10 o'clock, he had left his home at 9. This prevented him from paying immediate attention to the right hon. gentleman's communication; but when he did read its contents, he felt convinced that he could not have said any thing which could be construed into a personal attack upon that right hon. gentleman. The remarks which he had made were directed against his majesty's ministers in general, and not against any one of them in particular; what he had said was not said in anger -what he had uttered was uttered without malice, and came directly and sincerely from his heart. He therefore had no hesitation in addressing a letter to the right hon. gentleman, stating, that though he had not seen the newspaper, there was not a single sentence in his speech which could be considered as an attack upon his character. Anxious, however, that no time should be lost before the misrepresentation

said. When he had alluded to the gentlemen opposite, he had expressed a regret that the hon. member for Liverpool was not in his place among them; and he had no hesitation in saying that he had felt that regret, because, irritated as to the puny savings which the right hon. gentleman had said that the opposition side of the House were always recommending, he had intended to have expressed his opinion in stronger terms than he actually did express them regarding the conduct of the right hon. gentleman. It would be recollected, that they had sat for three successive days to the late hours of 2 or 3 in the morning; and this circumstance, joined to other engagements, prevented him from thinking of sending to the editor of " The Times," and desiring him to correct the misrepresentation. As soon as this idea occurred to him, he wrote to the editor, informing him of the calumnious mis-statement, and requested him to make an apology for it as public as was possible. The letter was sent by a servant of his own: at the time of his sending it, the editor was out of town; but as soon as he returned, he sent him (Mr. H.) a letter couched in strong terms of regret for the mistake which had occurred, and desiring to explain the circumstances under which it had originated. He had, however, declined to receive him (the editor), because he thought that the best course which he could adopt was, to send him a note, stating, that it was absolutely necessary that he should make an apology, and conveying him a copy of what had actually been said by himself on that day. This the editor did not receive till Sunday, which would account for the apology not appearing till the paper of Monday. The hon. member said, he regretted extremely that any such circumstance should have occurred between the right hon. gentle

he

man and himself; for if there was any in.
dividual in the House with
wished to stand well, it was the right hon.
gentleman. The course of their public
business brought them much together, and
if any thing was to be done between them,
it would be transacted better in an ami-
cable than in an unfriendly manner. Since
he had been a member of that House, he
had paid much attention to the debates
which had occurred in it, and to the man-
ner in which those debates had been re-
ported. From observation he could state,
that the reports in "The Times" were
very fair-in no other instance had he
seen any misrepresentation, and he was
inclined to think that this was not a wilful
mistake, or the effect of any malignant
feeling. If he had acceded to the request
made by the editor of "The Times," in
his letter, the right hon. gentleman might
perhaps have received such an explanation
as would have satisfied him. By not hav-
ing had an interview with him, and not
having introduced him, as he probably
wished, to the right hon. gentleman, he
might have deprived him of the opportu-
nity of offering such an exculpation of
himself as would have completely satisfied
that right hon. gentleman. He sincerely
believed, that the misrepresentation com-
plained of must have originated in mistake,
and not in a spirit of malignity and false-
hood.

Mr. Wynn said, that there was only one course for the House to pursue, and that was to call the publisher and printer to the bar of the House. The publishing of the debates in parliament, whether it was done by its permission or connivance, was of inestimable benefit to the public; but then it was proper that they should be fairly represented, and not converted into an engine to gratify private malice or party purposes. In the present case, he could not see how this misrepresentation was to be attributed to accident; and as he could not, it appeared to him to be precisely one of those cases in which the House was bound to assert the rights which it possessed. The breach of privilege was in the present instance of a complicated nature; the first breach of privilege he need not mention, as it was well known to every member in the House, and had now been overlooked for many years; the next breach of privilege was against the right hon. gentleman opposite, whose character had been calumniated; and the third breach against the right hon. gentleman to whom foul language had been attributed. There was no other course for the House to pursue than to order the printer to appear at its bar to

morrow.

The Speaker then put the question, that C. Bell be ordered to attend at the bar of the House to-morrow.

Mr. Wynn asked, whether the more usual way of proceeding was not to move a resolution that a breach of privilege had been committed, and then, after this resolution had been carried, to move that the publisher be heard at the bar of the House.

Mr.Lushingtonthought that no man could have any hesitation in declaring that this misrepresentation did not originate from accident. With regard to the assertion, that no other misrepresentation had taken place in "The Times" paper, many days had not elapsed since he had had reason to make a complaint of this very editor. He alluded to the mis-statements which had been given to the world respecting the case of captain Hanchett, regarding whose character he believed that an hon. gentleman opposite (Mr. Bennet), entertained nearly the same conviction as he did himself. He begged to press upon the attention of the House the effect of these misrepresentations. Many of those individuals who were politically opposed to him at Canterbury, were disseminating statements of his case, which they backed with quotations taken from The Times. This was a most foul abuse of the indul-mitted. gence granted by the House, and in the present case was of such a nature as to demand of the House, to interpose with its authority.

The Speaker said, that a case had occurred in 1805, where this mode of proceeding had been dispensed with. The printer of the paper had then been called to the bar, and asked whether he was editor of it likewise. There was, indeed, some difference between that case and the present: that case regarded a paragraph which commented upon the conduct of certain members of parliament: this related to the publishing, and the publishing incorrectly, the debates which occurred in this House. One breach of privilege was therefore most undoubtedly com

The Speaker then put the question a second time, that C. Bell do attend the bar of the House to-morrow.

Some hon. members suggested the pro

priety of making a similar order with regard to the editor of The Times.

Mr. E. Littleton concurred in this suggestion; as he thought that the paragraph was conceived in malignity, and was en gendered in falsehood.

The Speaker said, that the House would see the awkward situation in which its officers would be placed, if an order should be issued to compel the attendance of the editor, and the officers should not know who the editor was. The House was in the habit of receiving information from its own members, and therefore, if any hon. member knew who the editor was, and would give that information, they were at liberty to receive such information, and to act upon it as should seem best to them. The printer was known, and therefore they could summon him and examine him at their bar.

Mr. Wynn observed, that the printer and publisher of the paper were the persons whom the law considered liable for every article that appeared in it. The order, compelling the editor's attendance would be in the nature of a general warrant, which it was well known was illegal. Unless, therefore, any gentleman would state who the editor was, the best plan that the House could pursue was, to examine the printer at the bar, and to obtain from him the name of the editor.

Mr. Littleton suggested, that there was one hon. gentleman in the House who could afford the information which it wished to obtain. It was the hon. gentleman who had carried on a correspondence with the editor.

Mr. Hume said, that he had written to the editor of The Times generally, and that the letters which he had received from him in return were written in the name of the editor, and dated from The Times office.

Lord Castlereagh observed, that there could be no doubt at all of the malignity of the publication. He thought that it would be expedient now, as in former cases of this nature, to pass a vote declaring it to be a gross breach of privilege. Mr. Wynn said, that whatever measure the House determined upon adopting, ought to be adopted with deliberation. This paragraph first of all was a breach of privilege; and 2ndly, a most gross and infamous libel. That consideration would come before the notice of the House more properly to-morrow.

Mr. Brougham observed, that there was

only one opinion and one feeling on the subject; and every one who had heard the clear and able statement of the right hon. gentleman opposite, could not help concluding that this paragraph was a breach of the privilege of the House. As that question was, therefore, already settled, he did not rise to say any thing upon it; though he must entreat the attention of the House before they entered further upon this business. It was very clear that the matter could not stop in its present stage: he did not mean to say that this was an argument against their proceeding further in it, but that this was not the only newspaper in which the most malignant attacks had been made upon honourable members, in contempt of all the privileges of the House. He did not allude now to the specific breach of privilege committed in the publishing of the debates, by which the House, the country, the constitution, and no one part of it more than the executive government, were highly benefitted, but to those gross misrepresentations by way of comment on the debates of the House, which must arise either from the most culpable negligence, or the most abominable malignity. These mis-statements were not brought forward in the clumsy mode which was complained of to-night; they were not put by a reporter into the mouth of another, but they were the declared com. ments of the publisher, who was either guilty of the misrepresentation himself, or else had lent himself most unjustifiably to it. To give instances of this nature would be endless. He should content himself with mentioning one case in which his own character had been attacked, and his meaning misrepresented. After the satisfactory denial in that House by his noble friend, the member for Yorkshire, of the circumstances to which allusion had been made, he took no further notice of the subject; and it gave him satisfaction, because he knew that at that time other gentlemen had grounds to bring forward similar complaints, and which must have been brought forward if he had persevered; if A took notice of one attack, B and C would be under a sort of necessity of following it up with such as had been made upon them. Only a few weeks ago, one of the public papers had most unjus tifiably assailed the hon. member for Southwark, and had even endeavoured to expose him to popular violence. What he apprehended was, that if in consequence

of the very just statement of the circumstances of the case by the right hon. gentleman, the House thought fit to proceed further, it might be called upon so frequently to adopt the same steps as to the past. As to the future, it would be their own fault if the editors of newspapers incurred the displeasure of the House. The complaints as to the past would be endless and the result must be an injurious impediment to the free communication of the proceedings of the House to the public. At the same time, he by no means intended to oppose the motion, if it was thought good to press it forward. He entertained as strong an opinion and as warm a feeling upon this subject as any hon. member; he only called their attention to the probable consequences of the course now suggested. Undoubtedly the abuse was gross, and it was necessary that it should be checked; but he thought that more good would perhaps be attained by stopping here than by taking any more severe notice of the matter. If he might presume to offer advice to the House, his advice would be, that it should not go beyond the letter of the example that had been set on a former occasion; if it did, complaints could not be confined to misstatements in reports, but must extend to breaches of privilege in comments upon them.

Mr. Canning again rose, merely be cause the hon. member had called upon him for an opinion. When he put the newspaper into the hand of the clerk, he had declared his determination to take no farther part in the discussion. He had discharged a painful duty in bringing the subject forward: he had done so after much deliberation; and whether such conduct were or were not fit, it had been influenced by no wish to gratify personal feelings.

Mr. J. W. Ward observed, that the course recommended by the hon. member would lead to this inconvenience-that it would open the door to endless attacks of the same unwarrantable kind that had been made, not only on his right hon. friend, but on the hon. and learned gentleman. He referred to the similar complaint made by that hon. gentleman, and to the milder notice that at his suggestion had been taken of it by the House. The hon. gentleman suggested that the same course ought now to be pursued; that further steps should be wisely abstained from; but it was precisely because the

House had acted unwisely upon that occasion, that the House was now troubled with a repetition of the offence. He did not see how the House could allow this attack to pass without some sort of punishment; it ought not to pass wholly unnoticed, unless the House meant it to be understood, that in future all attacks might be made with impunity. He could hardly conceive it possible that the utmost licence of falsehood and malignity could carry the press further in a violation of the privileges exercised by the House. With whatever favour the House might be led to regard the publication of its debates, it was impossible that such an excess of licence could be permitted, and for this plain reason-that it was suspending over the House a power greater than itself: it was, in fact, rendering the press master of the parliament, and of the characters, feelings, and individuals of the persons composing it.

The question was then put and carried, that Mr. C. Bell do attend the House to morrow.

On the

CASH PAYMENTS BILL.] order of the day for the third reading of this bill,

Mr. Manning observed, that he wished to propose a clause which he conceived essential to this bill. The Bank committee had reported, that in order to prepare for the resumption of cash payments, it was necessary to pay to the Bank 10 millions of the debt due to them by government. He had looked over the bill very minutely but could not find a single word which provided for the repayment of this sum. It was necessary, however, that some steps should be taken to this effect. If parliament made it imperative on the Bank to resume payments in bullion at a certain period, and ultimately to pay in specie, they ought to adopt such measures as would enable the Bank to mect the wishes of the House. was, to secure the opinion of the House, that the sum of five millions ought to be secured to the Bank, to be paid up at an early period next year. If this clause were adopted the payments would not commence until July, and would not be made up until the 15th of April next year which was more than two months later than the chancellor of the exchequer contemplated. In moving this clause, he was not actuated by any hostile feeling, neither he nor the other directors wished to

His object

throw any impediment in the way of ministers, or to prevent the recommendation of the committee from being carried into effect. All he wished for was, that parliament would secure to the Bank the payment, within a certain period, of five millions due to them by government. The clause he meant to propose was, "That in order to enable the Bank to have a perfect control over its issues of notes, and to enable them to provide for the proposed payments in gold, it was necessary that government should secure the payment of the proposed sum of 5,000,000l. to be paid in monthly instalments of 500,000l. commencing on the 15th July next, and to be continued monthly until the 15th of April which would make good the above

country in the same situation as it stood in 1816. It would further have the effect of impressing the public that parliament was not quite in earnest in its efforts to resume cash payments. He had no objection to the clause now proposed, as it did not make against the principle of the bill.

Mr. Dennison observed, that the great issues of the Bank were occasioned by the wants of an expensive administration, and he thought that measures ought to be taken to place the Bank in a situation to fulfil the conditions imposed on them by parliament.

The clause was agreed to, and added to the bill by way of rider Mr. Manning then proposed his clause.

The Chancellor of the Exchequer ob

sum." Lord Castlereagh requested of the hon.jected to it on the ground that it would member to postpone this clause until the chancellor of the exchequer was in his place.

be improper to tie government up to any specific period when this sum was to be paid to the Bank. The hon. director knew Mr. Ellice said, he intended to propose that if the Bank had made advances on a clause or two which he conceived im- the present loan, as they had done on portant to the bill. His object was, to do former loans, provision might easily have away the alarm which was excited from been made to repay this sum. Of the prethe Bank narrowing its issues. If the Bank sent loan of 12 millions, 6,000,000l. was in reduced their issues, merchants could call exchequer bills, and the other 6,000,000?. for gold bars in the course of next year, was to be made good by monthly payand would have the option of sending them ments of 600,000l. out of which it would to the Mint, to be coined into guineas at be impossible to pay 500,000l. per month the rate of 31. 17s. 10d. per ounce. If to the Bank. It was intended to take this was done in order to increase the 12,000,000l. from the sinking fund, but circulating medium, the money so coined this was to be applied to the current sermust ultimately find its way into the Bank, vice of the year. The hon. member was the great depôt of all large payments. But aware, that of this loan, near three milaccording to the proposed regulations the lions would be to be paid after April. It Bank could not re-issue this money until was intended that the proposed sum 1823. The object of the clause he meant should be paid in the course of this and the to propose was, to leave it at the option of next year, but he could not consent to the Bank to pay or exchange their 1. and fetter government to a specific mode of 21. notes in gold, at any intermediate payment, which it was more than probaperiod between those mentioned by the ble they would be unable to fulfil. report. If this was adopted, he intended to propose some amendments in the body of the bill. The hon. member then moved the following clause: "Provided also, and be it hereby enacted, that the governor and company of the Bank of England, if they shall see fit, may at any time on or after the 1st of May 1821, pay or exchange the lawful coin of the realm, for the notes of the Bank, payable on demand, any provisions in this act, or in the before recited acts to the contrary notwithstand-placed. standing."

Mr. Peel said, he could not agree to the clause proposed by the hon. member, as it would have the effect of placing the

Mr. Ellice was of opinion, that there was strong reason for binding government on this subject, and thought that whilst every thing was required from the Bank, nothing was done for them. He admitted, however, that there might be difficulty in making regular payments during the present year. The Bank, he conceived, acted wisely in refusing to make any advances upon the present loan, under the circumstances in which they were now

Mr. J. Martin suggested, that if the Bank were to sell exchequer bills at those periods when they had just paid the public dividends, their own notes would flow

« ÖncekiDevam »